This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2007-07-27 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| Furthermore, the Court has held in a number of cases that forgery cannot be presumed. It must be proved by clear, positive and convincing evidence,[21] and whoever alleges it has the burden of proving the same,[22] a burden which petitioner failed to discharge convincingly. Here, petitioner failed to override the evidentiary value of the duly notarized deed of REM and promissory note. As a notarized document, the deed of REM and promissory note enjoy the presumption of due execution. However, no evidence was presented by petitioner to overcome this presumption. Other than her own declaration that her signatures on the questioned documents were forged and the prayer booklets which she presented during trial, petitioner presented no other proof to corroborate her claim. Such an allegation and evidence are insufficient to overcome a notarized document's presumption of due execution. Hence, this Court cannot accept the claim of forgery in the absence of other witnesses, save for petitioner herself, who would testify that petitioner's signatures on the prayer booklets are in fact her customary way of signing. | |||||
|
2006-10-23 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| In the offense of robbery with homicide, a crime primarily classified as one against property and not against persons, the prosecution has to firmly establish the following elements: (a) the taking of personal property with the use of violence or intimidation against the person; (b) the property thus taken belongs to another; (c) the taking is characterized by intent to gain or animus lucrandi; and (d) on the occasion of the robbery or by reason thereof, the crime of homicide, which is therein used in a generic sense, was committed.[33] The accused must be shown to have the principal purpose of committing robbery, the homicide being committed either by reason of or on occasion of the robbery.[34] The intent to rob must precede the taking of human life. So long as the intention of the felons was to rob, the killing may occur before, during or after the robbery.[35] The original design must have been robbery, and the homicide, even if it precedes or is subsequent to the robbery, must have a direct relation to, or must be perpetrated with a view to consummate the robbery. The taking of the property should not be merely an afterthought which arose subsequently to the killing.[36] | |||||